RE: New 2.0-litre Mercedes-AMG C63 officially unveiled

RE: New 2.0-litre Mercedes-AMG C63 officially unveiled

Author
Discussion

stuckmojo

2,536 posts

169 months

Trying to reconcile on why I don't like the idea of this car - almost like justifying my own opinion - I think I know why now:

- The V8 was the centre piece of the car, around which an estate body with brutish beahviour sounded quite compelling for entirely emotional reasons

Which is why - in my mind, a car which needs to complement an incredibly highly strung 4pot with 9 speed gearboxes, batteries, electric motors with another gearbox, hugely complex systems including modulated sounds to make it all work so people forget that once a V8 alone covered the full emotional spectrum, is ultimately a less exciting compromise.

A bit like burgers vs fake meat burgers

For one all you need is meat

For the other - which isn't as good (and even admitting it could be as good - you need a long list of ingredients that all need to be work perfectly together to emulate what a burger is.


BS62

1,904 posts

147 months

stuckmojo said:
- The V8 was the centre piece of the car, around which an estate body with brutish beahviour sounded quite compelling for entirely emotional reasons
I have been unable to articulate this but I think that's nailed it.

Old C63 = handbuilt V8 wrapped in a small car.
New C63 = very very fast hybrid

Perhaps the problem is the badge. If they'd called it the AMG C680 or C500 and just quietly stopped mentioning the C63 fickle people like me would have been more likely to go "Ooooooh, powerful" rather than "meh, no V8."

On that note: "Oooooooh, it IS powerful..."

otolith

49,244 posts

185 months

Julian Scott said:
I agree, except it isn't 680BHP apart from the first 10 seconds. Then it's 476bhp with a limited boost option up to about 580bhp, which in a 2.1 tonne car, will likely be slower than a 500bhp 1700/1800kg M3/RS4
To be fair, opportunities to use full power for more than 10 seconds at a time will be limited.

Unreal

319 posts

6 months

otolith said:
Julian Scott said:
I agree, except it isn't 680BHP apart from the first 10 seconds. Then it's 476bhp with a limited boost option up to about 580bhp, which in a 2.1 tonne car, will likely be slower than a 500bhp 1700/1800kg M3/RS4
To be fair, opportunities to use full power for more than 10 seconds at a time will be limited.
Not at the golf club, pub or on here.

otolith

49,244 posts

185 months

Unreal said:
Not at the golf club, pub or on here.
I should think the groundsman would have something to say about that!

stickleback123

8,891 posts

170 months

The 2.2 ton weight really is astonishing. For context this is a four pot hybrid C class estate that weighs only 200KG less than a Maybach S650 twin turbo V12 that has a fking refrigerator in it. Sporty as fk, that is.

Its Just Adz

11,696 posts

190 months

Fastdruid said:
To be slightly fair I would assume that is the EU (1230/2012/EEC) weight measurement which does at least mean it includes both driver and 90% fuel in that 2111Kg.

  • "the mass of the vehicle, with its fuel tank(s) filled to at least 90 % of its or their capacity/ies, including the mass of the driver, of the fuel and liquids, fitted with the standard equipment in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications and, when they are fitted, the mass of the bodywork, the cabin, the coupling and the spare wheel(s) as well as the tools"
Note also that there are big differences (legally) between how cars curb weights are measured in different countries, for example in the US the legislation states that the curb weight should include options that are expected to be installed in more than 1/3rd of vehicles. So as an example they would list the weight for the automatic even though the manual version might be 40Kg lighter. Equally the older EU standard didn't included the driver (and may not included spare wheel etc if it's an option). So always be wary when comparing weights.
Ah thanks, informative post!

To be fair, I was thinking 2100+ without driver and then add 100kg on top for person and assorted crap that comes with a human.

covmutley

2,606 posts

171 months

otolith said:
To be fair, opportunities to use full power for more than 10 seconds at a time will be limited.

More like any more than 5 seconds, and that assumes a standing rather than rolling start.

Pointless amount of power

blearyeyedboy

5,698 posts

160 months

Derventio said:
The second thing that has changed my mind, is that one of my all time favourite performance Mercedes cars only had four cylinders. This in no way diminished my serious want for one.
It's a broad church, as you say. Elsewhere on this forum, I've made similar defences of four-cylinder F-Types and Supras. The loss of mass between the front wheels is only going to help handling.

In my mind, that bonus is diminished by the sheer weight if this thing. Without the next generation of torque vectoring technology to help out asking it will always struggle to contain the physics of its actions. Clever suspension and drivetrains help but can only do so much.

I'd be happy to be proved wrong- in fact, I'd be delighted to be proved wrong-and have the C63 alive and well in a modern form- but this isn't interesting me right now.

biggbn

15,116 posts

201 months

Mouse Rat said:
biggbn said:
Dombilano said:
biggbn said:
It would be interesting to know how many of the posters who are complaining about the weight and the four pot would even notice if they drove it and hadn't been told? Would the performance, the 'piped' music and the occasion 'fool' them?
You'd notice the weight the first corner you approached at 70mph
You might, how many really would? The handling of some properly heavy cars is astonishing nowadays.
When I test drove a C63 cab last year I noticed it was heavy in the first corner under breaking. Checked the weight after at 1.9 tons!
Again, experienced drivers would certainly notice the weight, my musing was how many who buy this will actually notice the extra poundage, how many are people like you?

D4rez

512 posts

37 months

The complaining would’ve been worse still if it was an EV. The next one will be, I would celebrate the last opportunities to own an ICE C class AMG if I were you.

nismo48

1,234 posts

188 months

D4rez said:
The complaining would’ve been worse still if it was an EV. The next one will be, I would celebrate the last opportunities to own an ICE C class AMG if I were you.
thumbup Well said, enjoy this now for what it is..Life is far too short to moan about the negatives if any... smile

Lozw86

831 posts

113 months

Will the E, S, GLE and G class vehicles get 4 cylinders I wonder?

TeaVR

1,112 posts

208 months

BMWs have been sounding crap for a while now (fake engine noises and fart fart fart bang exhausts), but the outgoing C63 (w205) still sounds epic - so it's a massive downgrade to a 4 pot.

Actually surprised they didn't go fully elecric.

JAMSXR

701 posts

28 months

I find it slightly bizarre that people will be visiting their garage with a broken bumper speaker. Whoever thought that was a good idea…

Axe wound

1,103 posts

82 months

Saturday
quotequote all

Blue383

82 posts

98 months

Saturday
quotequote all
A C63 for the grown up Corsa boys. It’s a no from me I’m afraid. I’ve been there and done that with 400+ bhp four pots with Imprezas’ and S14s’. Yes they’re quick but it’s not the experience of a large smooth torquey V8 or even straight 6.

I’ll be trading my bought new E400 for second hand XJR this time around.

Blue383

82 posts

98 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Mercutio said:
Sometimes it's not just about power. About 0-60, about speeds, about where that power is deployed.

It's about a feeling, a kind of shiver and fear and excitement when an engine starts, the wide eyed look when the power starts to come on, the noise, the sheer visceral connection.

That is genuinely what a good V8 does for me. And what I fear will inevitably be lost here.

That doesn't mean I don't care about it, that I don't care about the planet etc. I just know what I want, won't come from this powerplant and setup.

Good luck to Merc, good luck to all buyers. It's surely a great car, but it's not my car.
Couldn’t put it any better than this.

NDNDNDND

1,634 posts

164 months

Saturday
quotequote all
It's a pity they couldn't have taken a more imaginative approach and heavily-hybridised the V8. They could have stripped off the turbos, retuned it for revs and peak power, and used the electric system for torque-fill and to achieve economy.

Could have actually been quite awesome, coupling a useful electric drivetrain with a properly angry V8. It would probably be even heavier, mind...

This 4-pot, however, feels like it's been made deliberately crap, stripping away its virtues as if to suggest the car would be better off as an EV.

As posted earlier, the only slim advantage this car has over an EV is range.

DMZ

592 posts

141 months

Saturday
quotequote all
Yep, assuming just looking at metrics tells you anything about how it will drive. I suspect it will drive like nothing else personally because the drivetrain is like nothing else, at least south of Koenigsegg. I'd say the Polestar 1 is the closest but it's nowhere near as sophisticated from what I know. And as these things go, it's interesting that there is something new coming. You can obviously buy a turbo V8 every day of the week or the older glorious 6.2l NA V8 so you could also argue that making yet another one that's a bit more strangled but with a new screen is kind of pointless too. We're in the era of drivetrain innovation now, not just churning out mildly improved versions of what's on the shelf, and maybe that's a good thing. If not, there's always the old stuff.

Tbh I have a pretty low opinion of hybridised 6s or 8s at least in the PHEV sense. You want those on song all the time, why turn them off?